Yes, indeed.  I listened to the call and was disappointed by staff's proposal to control the accountability process and defensiveness when called on it.   We have been asking staff for information on what it would be proposing for a couple months (at GNSO mtg & last "leaders" call) and we were just told not to worry about it, that staff was busy compiling the input and would dialogue with us soon.  Finally, without seeing the "synthesis" of the community input, we get this half-baked proposal from Fadi that calls for a process of two-tier accountability groups in which board-staff controls the group that "prioritizes" issues and "solutions".  The 7 "experts" board selects for this group aren't really part of a "community" coordination group.  Experts are great, but they should be selected by and report to the community (not board-staff) and not pretend like they represent stakeholders in the community.  Also, staff's proposal doesn't quite say who will be making final decisions regarding the output of the groups proposed.   Also, staff should be in this group in an informational / support / liaison sort of role, not as an equal participant with the community members.

Rather than try to design the whole accountability process internally to create a process that board-staff could control the output of, the community should have been engaged in the formulation of this proposal, as we've been asking every time we get to speak to them.  

It seems like the input staff will now take is minor, around the edges and relating to the community assembly / working group -- and NOT the more important decisional body it is proposing.  Hopefully we can get some significant changes and clarifications to this staff proposal for accountability at ICANN before Fadi declares that the community is aligned in support of his plan. 

Rafik, can you relay my concerns back to staff? (or if there is a mechanism for me to do that, I'd be glad to do it myself).  But this accountability plan is half-baked and needs more input from the community before it should go forward.  

When will staff learn that trust must be earned and these sorts of constant shenanigans only hinder confidence and trust in ICANN's legitimacy to govern?

Thanks,
Robin


On Aug 6, 2014, at 8:06 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Interesting reading
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: 	[council] FW: FYI - Recording and Transcript of 4 August 2014
> ICANN Accountability Leadership Discussion
> Date: 	Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:34:10 +0100
> From: 	Jonathan Robinson <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: 	<[log in to unmask]>
> Organization: 	Afilias
> To: 	<[log in to unmask]>
> 
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> 
> 
> FYI.
> 
> 
> 
> Audio not attached (its 16MB). All available at the link below.
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> *From:*Robert Hoggarth [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> *Sent:* 05 August 2014 18:30
> *To:* Theresa Swinehart; David Olive; Byron Holland;
> [log in to unmask]; Jonathan Robinson; Louie Lee; Olivier MJ
> Crepin-Leblond; Patrik Fältström; Jun Murai; Lars-Johan Liman; Elisa
> Cooper; tony holmes; Kristina Rosette; Rafik Dammak; William Drake; Rudi
> Vansnick; Michele Neylon :: Blacknight; Drazek, Keith
> *Cc:* Susie Johnson; Tina Shelebian; Global Leadership; Duncan Burns;
> Samantha Eisner; Bart Boswinkel; Marika Konings; Heidi Ullrich; Steve Sheng
> *Subject:* FYI - Recording and Transcript of 4 August 2014 ICANN
> Accountability Leadership Discussion
> 
> 
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> 
> 
> Attached please find the recording of yesterday's discussion along with
> the call transcript and the AC Room chat transcript.  All three
> documents are now posted on the CEO-SO/AC/SG Leadership Connect page
> at https://community.icann.org/display/soaceinputfdback/Event+Calendar .
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> 
> <Transcript - Special ICANN Acctblty Session_20140804_SOACSG_Fadi.pdf><August 4 2014 Chat Special Session.pdf>